[stanleyk]

Pentax already had FF DSLR back in 2000, MZ-D or MR-52. Based on that experience, I am sure they can quickly assemble a FF DSLR with current crop of sensor and micro-processor and price it around $3,000. 2012 is going to be an interesting year; I skip K-5 and put some funds aside and am waiting for either Pentax or Fuji's new body. I already have the compact x10 and am quite happy with it.

Pentax would have to knock it out of the park for me to not get the new Fuji. I almost got the X10 but put the money on another Nikon lens. Personally one DSLR body is enough for me. I don't understand all the complaints over EVF's especially if someone wants to use an older K mount lens. The K5's viewfinder is one of the worst I've ever used. I don't feel like spending an extra $200 to get a split prism for it. It should work out of the box. The one on the G3 is much better for manual focus, it's not even really close. I have no problem focusing F1.4 and F1.7 lenses with it. I also use a D700 now that' a good OVF. It also helps that the focus confirmation is really accurate right out of the box. The K5 definitely not. In the end I found that I could get just as good a photos and in some cases depending on the lens better photos with an X100 or GXR than I could with the K5. I think a mirrorless Pentax is the way to go but again it would have to be a really good camera for me not to consider the upcoming Fuji. If the mirrorless Pentax was Full Frame and they made the right lenses for it then yes I would probably get it over the Fuji.

[Anvh]

That's not nearly fast enough. That's terrible.

You live in a different place then me
I really need to think very hard when i used a shutterspeed above that number...

The EVF is already good enough. And future ones will be better and better.

They are getting there but i still don't like them, the lag with them is a problem because i shoot with two eyes open so it makes me sick...

[Fontan]

Flopless?
Prismless?
Humpless?
Movingpartsless?
In-the-way-of-the-sensor-less?
Steampunk-things-that-do-stuff-that-aren't-needed-any-more-less?

I hope for stain-less.

[Winder]

Pentax would have to knock it out of the park for me to not get the new Fuji. I almost got the X10 but put the money on another Nikon lens. Personally one DSLR body is enough for me. I don't understand all the complaints over EVF's especially if someone wants to use an older K mount lens. The K5's viewfinder is one of the worst I've ever used. I don't feel like spending an extra $200 to get a split prism for it. It should work out of the box. The one on the G3 is much better for manual focus, it's not even really close. I have no problem focusing F1.4 and F1.7 lenses with it. I also use a D700 now that' a good OVF. It also helps that the focus confirmation is really accurate right out of the box. The K5 definitely not. In the end I found that I could get just as good a photos and in some cases depending on the lens better photos with an X100 or GXR than I could with the K5. I think a mirrorless Pentax is the way to go but again it would have to be a really good camera for me not to consider the upcoming Fuji. If the mirrorless Pentax was Full Frame and they made the right lenses for it then yes I would probably get it over the Fuji.

I am definitely interested in the Fuji, but we will have to see what they put on the market. Their interface is not a smooth as I like and they still have a few kinks to workout, but Fuji is a really interesting company that puts out high quality products.

The rumors of them buying Olympus are exciting. I have always thought Fuji and Olympus would merge. They complement each other really well, and Olympus needs a company with a strong sensor development background.

[jolepp]

I hope for stain-less.

More or less regardless of mirrorless?

[kswier]

Pentax would have to knock it out of the park for me to not get the new Fuji. I almost got the X10 but put the money on another Nikon lens. Personally one DSLR body is enough for me. I don't understand all the complaints over EVF's especially if someone wants to use an older K mount lens. The K5's viewfinder is one of the worst I've ever used. I don't feel like spending an extra $200 to get a split prism for it. It should work out of the box. The one on the G3 is much better for manual focus, it's not even really close. I have no problem focusing F1.4 and F1.7 lenses with it. I also use a D700 now that' a good OVF. It also helps that the focus confirmation is really accurate right out of the box. The K5 definitely not. In the end I found that I could get just as good a photos and in some cases depending on the lens better photos with an X100 or GXR than I could with the K5. I think a mirrorless Pentax is the way to go but again it would have to be a really good camera for me not to consider the upcoming Fuji. If the mirrorless Pentax was Full Frame and they made the right lenses for it then yes I would probably get it over the Fuji.

I agree. I am looking for some kind of upgrade from my k200D sometime in the next year (since I am hopefully getting my first real job). What I want is a small camera with a large sensor that provides me with control over depth of field (and a camera that can go higher than ISO 1600). Keeping a camera with an APS-C sensor small requires prime lenses. This is fine with me, as I am currently using a da40 limited.

What are the things I care about in a new camera:
- At least 2 stops improvement in low light performance over k200D (most new APS-C cameras have this)
- Quiet (I do not like having heads turning every time I take a picture)
- Small (does not have to be pocket-able, but I want a case I can clip onto a belt, or at least one that is less intrusive than the DSLR bazooka case)
- control over depth of field (I have drawn the line at a minimum of a APS-C sensor, and I do necessarily care about full frame. I care more about the size of the system)
- Supports manual focusing (allowing the use of a large range of great lenses)
- A good video mode (with manual controls)
- Good build quality (at least as good a the k200D, would like it weather sealed, but not 100% necessary)
- Hybrid viewfinder (not 100% needed but preferable. Even if EVF's become superior, shooting though a OVF will always feel more organic to me. After all, I look into a LCD screen enough at work)
- Not a menu based camera (If i have to go pouring through menus to find basic functions I will not purchase it)
- Not too expensive (after it is out for a year, it should be less than $1,000 for the body and ~$400-$500 for prime lenses)

The new new Fuji sounds like it will meet a lot of this criteria. If it is like the x100, all I want them to do is add interchangeable lenses, a mechanical focus ring, and focus peeking on the optical viewfinder. I love Pentax at a brand and would prefer staying with them, but if rumors are correct Fuji is building the camera that will be closest to meeting my criteria. Pentax has the potential to offer a very nice mirrorless camera, but I have the gut feeling that they will not provide the features that I find important. Some things Pentax could do to make a mirrorless camera more attractive is providing a fully functioning adapter to k-mount lenses, weather sealing, creating a set of limited lenses for the mirrorless system, etc. And of course they have to get the basics right.

[Clavius]

Ok, if mirrorless camera's are so good... Then why don't pro's use them?!

IMHO EVIL's suck because:

- Lack of ergonomics for photographers with large hands. (I'm 6'5", and I'm not the only one from my parts of the world.) I do not want femcam's forced upon me.
- Overall Slower performance. That's what I noticed on the NEX5
- Lost of balance when long telelphoto-zoom lenses are being used. Besides that, it just looks very stupid.
- Small collection of interchangeable lenses. My LBA can no longer be satisfied!
- Doesn't look professional... Probably because it isn't. And the average marrying couple don't want prick with a tiny point-and shoot. They paid for a pro with a big DSLR with big quality.
- Lack of high-grade prime lenses
- Short battery life
- Shorter shutter life span
- Not weather sealed

[befocus]

Ok, if mirrorless camera's are so good... Then why don't pro's use them?!

IMHO EVIL's suck because:

- Lack of ergonomics for photographers with large hands. (I'm 6'5", and I'm not the only one from my parts of the world.) I do not want femcam's forced upon me.
- Overall Slower performance. That's what I noticed on the NEX5
- Lost of balance when long telelphoto-zoom lenses are being used. Besides that, it just looks very stupid.
- Small collection of interchangeable lenses. My LBA can no longer be satisfied!
- Doesn't look professional... Probably because it isn't. And the average marrying couple don't want prick with a tiny point-and shoot. They paid for a pro with a big DSLR with big quality.
- Lack of high-grade prime lenses
- Short battery life
- Shorter shutter life span
- Not weather sealed

these are the faults of the current mirrorless, but who tells you that the Pentax will be the same?

[stanleyk]

Ok, if mirrorless camera's are so good... Then why don't pro's use them?!

Well this guy is a pro. I think doing promo shoots for the Oscars, work for television networks and billboards counts as being a pro. He lists his gear at the bottom of the post as well as a link to his site where he discusses his work cameras. I'm guessing most of them are way beyond the budget of the members of this forum. But I did note on the gear list at the bottom, that the cameras he uses for his own enjoyment there wasn't a single mirrored camera listed. GXR, X100, X10, EP2. Based on the photos on this post and his website, I would venture to guess he knows a little bit about cameras.

Why I Shoot So Many Images as A Professional Photographer

[Emacs]

Ok, if mirrorless camera's are so good... Then why don't pro's use them?!

IMHO EVIL's suck because:

- Lack of ergonomics for photographers with large hands. (I'm 6'5", and I'm not the only one from my parts of the world.) I do not want femcam's forced upon me.
- Overall Slower performance. That's what I noticed on the NEX5
- Lost of balance when long telelphoto-zoom lenses are being used. Besides that, it just looks very stupid.
- Small collection of interchangeable lenses. My LBA can no longer be satisfied!
- Doesn't look professional... Probably because it isn't. And the average marrying couple don't want prick with a tiny point-and shoot. They paid for a pro with a big DSLR with big quality.
- Lack of high-grade prime lenses
- Short battery life
- Shorter shutter life span
- Not weather sealed

1) Lack of ergonomics: easily fixable
2) There's much room for improvement unlike SLRs which have already achieved their top. BTW, I did't notice it's slower than K-5. What's wrong with me?
3) Easily fixable. It's not hard to make huge and heavy EVIL.
4) Easily fixable. Wide end can be much better.
5) Well. Don't even try to deny you rather want to look like a photog than to be him. In this case you better switch to canon and their 70-200: they look much more professional than anything pentax has. Girls love it (strange thing, they love the Distagon 21 even more. Need to explain each time this lens is not for portraits )
6) Lack of high grade lenses? Get ones of leica and zeiss for zm. These gems blow cheap japans piece of glasses away.
7) Well, it's quite hard for sure.
8) Easily fixable. There's much room for improvement.
9) Easily fixable.
So, your claims look forced at least.

[stanleyk]

Ctein uses and EP3, Kirk Tuck uses Olympus Pens, Steve Huff uses mostly mirrorless cameras. What is the definition of pro? I'm just confused by this constant reference to "what the pros" do. It sounds a little silly to me. I doubt the person who is actually buying the groceries and paying the rent with the camera worries as much about their cameras as the "what the pros use" crowd does. Anyway, if you aren't supporting yourself with your camera why should you worry about it that much? Or just buy what the pros use. That would be another solution.

As for the lack of high grade prime lenses the lens on my X100 is easily the equal of the 31, 43, and 77 I also have. The lens on the GXR 28mm module is also as good. I will tell you none of them are as good as the Nikon 35mm F1.4G. In fact Pentax does not make lens that even approaches that one in terms image quality, so if you are worried about what the "pros" use so much you really should just switch brands. Just keep in mind that the Nikon 35mm is a $1600 lens. It costs more than a K5 body. The 24-70 costs more than the 50-135 and the 16-50 combined. The 14-24 costs $2000.

[deejjjaaaa]

- Lack of ergonomics for photographers with large hands. (I'm 6'5", and I'm not the only one from my parts of the world.) I do not want femcam's forced upon me.

EVIL can be made as large as dSLR, dSLR can't be made as small as EVIL

- Overall Slower performance. That's what I noticed on the NEX5

good judgement (one camera)

- Lost of balance when long telelphoto-zoom lenses are being used. Besides that, it just looks very stupid.

again - nothing prevents EVIL from being as large and heavy as customers need - provided that they actually need that.

- Small collection of interchangeable lenses. My LBA can no longer be satisfied!

you can mount much more lenses on any EVIL than on dSLR, granted not all of them will be AF

- Doesn't look professional... Probably because it isn't. And the average marrying couple don't want prick with a tiny point-and shoot. They paid for a pro with a big DSLR with big quality.

I doubt that really average marrying couple can afford one... when did you check median income figures in USA for example ?

- Lack of high-grade prime lenses

for example zeiss 135mm 1.8 can be mounted and af on evil camera and pentax has nothing better (at best the same)...

- Short battery life

true

- Shorter shutter life span

I still have perfectly working P&S (Nikon 4300) from 2002... there is no reason for EVIL to have shorter life span, except that customers tend to buy new bodies much sooner now being properly fed by marketing and R&D.

- Not weather sealed

nothing prevents EVIL from being sealed, the lack of sealed bodies just reflects the popular demand... moreover Olympus made a sealed lens, that is a good hint that some sealed body might be coming

[deejjjaaaa]

Then why don't pro's use them?!

professional photographers might not be using them to shot action - but the use of mirrorless cameras is sufficiently widespread in landscape/panorama shooting for example...

[kswier]

Ok, if mirrorless camera's are so good... Then why don't pro's use them?!

If I was a pro, I would not be interested in a mirrorless camera right now. They do not have the range of lenses or performance that a lot of pros depend on (not to say they never will). As an armature, it makes perfect sense. I do not need the fastest camera, because it is ok if I miss a photo (I will get the next one). If I was a pro, a louder camera is ok (people paid you to take pictures, they expect it). As an amateur , I do not want to be a disruption to an event (so I want a quiet camera). If I was a pro, I would want to use fast zoom lenses. These do not make sense on a small mirrorless body. As an amateur, I only feel the need for 3-4 prime lenses (again, if I miss a shot, it is ok. There will be plenty of other opportunities). As a pro, it is ok to have a large camera, since you are traveling to do photography. As an amateur, I travel to have fun, and part of that fun using my creative side and taking photos (thus, photography is a secondary goal).

I have different needs than most pros. When I purchased my camera a few years ago, there were not mirrorless options I found acceptable. Now there are, and I think they meed my personal needs better than a DSLR. They may not fit your needs. You might photograph different things than I do, or you do photography for a different reason than I do, and thus you may need a DSLR. That is ok (I do not think the DSLR is going anywhere anytime soon).

[eddie1960]

It really wont matter. Lenses for APS-C or FF really can not be made small enough to be pocket-able. The advantage is not to be able to make a FF that is pocket-able, but to make a FF or even a MF that is a little smaller than the K-7/K-5. High quality glass is going to be BIG. Size is only one reason to look into EVIL.

FF can't be small enough to be pocketable??

What about the m40 2.8
110 gr 1.8cm long deigned for FF

If you want fast though it will never be small. the size of the glass required for the front element will limit it. doesn't matter what platform it is.